• olgas_husband@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    are they trots or something else? im reading a little book called What is Dialects by Alexandre Konder, a brazilian author, he goes to similar points, he says that there was metaphysics tendencies growing in communists parties around europe, especially in germany with Berninstein, then Lenin dissed the shit out of everyone in What is to be done, to correct these tendencies, that made possible due to Lenin deep understanding of hegelian dialects, then everything went to crap when Stalin came to power because he despised theory, but had a amazing ability to make didactic examples like in the text historical materialism and dialectical materialism, but still weak on hegel, something something that paved way to revisionists like kruchov to rise.

    i felt compelled to translate the part and bring to you guys, but coincidentally the subject came up, so, what is the deal with that? is any of this true that stalin wasn’t up in theory and didn’t understood stuff?

    • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes there are trots, but this specific individual was like “stop trying to put labels on me, I’m just a Marxist,” acknowledging the Trotskyism and left communism are dead and they don’t technically identify with them.

    • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      everything went to crap when Stalin came to power because he despised theory ???

      Is this a different Stalin they are talking about? Or are they talking about the actual historical Joseph Vissarionovich who was an avid reader and had an entire library full of books, who wrote multiple books on Marxist-Leninist theory, on Soviet economics, on philosophy, etc.? Come on, even all the anti-communist historians who call him a dictator don’t deny how much of a nerd and a bookworm he was.

      • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        You see there are 2 Stalin. The material Stalin, a successful revolutionary that led the Soviet Union to a higher stage of development, and the metaphysical Stalin, developed by the anti-communist scholars and resentful politicians, that was reduced to literally Hitler.

    • Soviet Pigeon@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Bernstein was someone with an quite bourgeois mindset. He is mentioned enough in “What has do be done” and Renegade Kautsky. Give those books a chance and read them, they are not hard at all.

      is any of this true that stalin wasn’t up in theory and didn’t understood stuff?

      I would more like to encourage you to find it out. Even if someone will tell you, that it is true or not true, you are just relying on those words.

      • olgas_husband@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’ve been reading a little, i got recommended the mentioned texts here on lemmygrad, not gonna lie that trying to learn philosophy has been a frustrating endeavor, to the point that i don’t even know how to properly judge the quality of theory he produced, so i do rely on other people to help sort some thoughts.

        i do know his about his achievements as a leader and why west demonizes him so much, ik it is stupid to use liberals as a compass, anyway, i will keep trying to read more.

        • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Theory is judged in practice, if it doesn’t work it’s left behind, if it works it continues to be developed.

          “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.” - karl marx